MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404420110 · doi:10.24908/pocus.v9i2.17635

Just In Time! Assessment of Internal Medicine Resident Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Attitudes and Behaviors After Spaced Intervention at Two Residency Programs

2024· article· en· W4404420110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin Piro, Patricia A. Carney, Christopher J. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePOCUS Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint of care ultrasoundMedicineCurriculumDocumentationPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Psychomotor learningPhysical therapyUltrasoundNursingPsychologyComputer sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is a complex psychomotor skill that requires scaffolded support for skill acquisition. However, the effect of spaced curricular elements on learner POCUS behaviors are not clearly understood. Using a multi-site observational cross-sectional survey study, we measured resident baseline POCUS use, behaviors, and attitudes and then implemented POCUS workflow and just-in-time POCUS curricula during internal medicine resident ward rotations and assessed changes. Self-reported personal and team POCUS use and documentation habits all improved between baseline and the just-in-time teaching. Personal POCUS use correlated with team POCUS use (ρ=0.431; p<0.001) and co-resident POCUS use (ρ=0.242; p=0.035). Attending POCUS use correlated with team POCUS use (ρ=0.523; p< 0.001), but not personal use. Overall, we found moderate, but statistically significant, improvements in reported resident and team performance of POCUS and documentation habits, suggesting that just-in-time interventions may promote POCUS use. Co-learning also appears to be a key influencer for POCUS use.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.388 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePOCUS JournalSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207